From http://www.bernama.com.my/bernama/state_ne...d=193904&cat=ct


April 26, 2006 19:58 PM

Armed Forces To Replace Steyr With Colt M4 Carbine

PETALING JAYA, April 26 (Bernama) -- The Malaysian Armed Forces will replace in stages their 100,000 Steyr assault rifles with the American-made lightweight Colt M4 Carbine 5.56mm, Deputy Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak said Wednesday.

SME Ordnance Sdn Bhd has been appointed to supply and deliver 14,000 Colt M4 Carbines at an estimated cost of RM70 million.

The Letter of Intent was handed over to the company by Najib at the 10th Defence Services Asia Exhibition 2006 held in Subang here.

"The Colt M4 Carbine has been found to be the most suitable for the Armed Forces from the aspect of user friendliness and product innovation," he told reporters.

The government announced recently that the Austrian-made Steyr assault rifle, which had been used for 15 years, would be phased out.

The Colt M4 Carbine is the standard infantry assault rifle used by the United States military and is favoured in modern tactical combat operations.

Najib, who is also the Defence Minister, said the delivery of the Colt M4 Carbines would start this year.

He said the new weapon was designed to accept accessories like a grenade launcher.

Najib also said the Royal Malaysian Air Force's (RMAF) Pilatus PC-7 MKI turbo trainer aircraft would be phased out in stages and replaced with the PC-7 MKII aircraft.

The PC-7 MKII is more advanced and equipped with ejector seats which will enable the pilot to escape in any emergency that causes the plane to crash.

"The first delivery of PC-7 MKII will be made within 16 months from now and it is up to RMAF to decide when to phase out the PC-7 MKI entirely," he said.

The RM213.4 million contract to supply 10 PC-7 MKII aircraft, one flight training device, supplies and services and standardisation of eight PC-7 MKII was awarded to Pilatus Aircraft Ltd, based in Switzerland.

Najib also handed over a Letter of Acceptance to Avibras Industria Aerospacial International Ltd of Brazil for the supply and delivery of MLRS Astros II guided missile spares for the Malaysian army at an estimated cost of RM27 million.

At the event, Najib witnessed the signing of contracts between the Defence Ministry and three local companies for the supply of various types of equipment and services.

Satang Jaya Sdn Bhd will supply articles, services and technical assistance (specific to safety and survival equipment), Zetro Services Sdn Bhd will supply articles, services and technical assistance for ground electronics and avionics while Sapura Defence Sdn Bhd will provide maintenance of RMAF simulator systems.

-- BERNAMA

:blink: :blink: :blink: :blink:

Backtracking is one, and of all the options, M4 Carbine?

24 Apr 2006
PETALING JAYA: It took several years and billions of ringgit but the Malaysian defence industry can finally be proud.

Local heavyweights DRB-Hicom Defence Technology Sdn Bhd (Deftech) will launch the first Malaysian-made light armoured vehicle today, to coincide with the opening of the Defence Services Asia exhibition 2006.

The vehicle is the pride of Deftech, which thus far has only assembled and manufactured military vehicles under licence from foreign companies.

The four-wheeled Deftech AV4 is an all-wheel-drive light armoured vehicle capable of carrying up to eight people or a payload of two tonnes.

The vehicle is capable of withstanding small arms fire, making it suitable for peacekeeping missions. Its underside is protected, ensuring the safety of those travelling in it.

Deftech, a division of Malaysian company DRB-Hicom, unveiled its AV4 light-armored vehicle at the expo Monday.

"The AV4 is purely a Malaysian product with some foreign expertise," said Deftech's sales and marketing manager Godfrey Chang. "We are hoping to sell to the ASEAN region first, and then to the Middle East," Chang added.

The AV4 is the second such vehicle produced in Southeast Asia after the Bionix launched by Singapore Technologies a few years ago.

As he opened the four-day expo, Deputy Prime Minister and Defense Minister Najib Razak stuck a "Made in Malaysia" sticker on the AV4.

source: The Jakarta Post.com
http://72.14.207.104/search?q=cache:-F3xla...en&ct=clnk&cd=6

I wonder how many of these babies the MAF are ordering. Would be interesting to see how the MAF will deploy these machines.

Steyr Aug is a good assault rifle (AF) . Any specific reasons why they are replacing them ??

Agree with Southpark above, of all reason, an M4 carbine to replace a proper general purpose AF ?? Are they expecting some sort of a close range combat in the future ??

Dont mean to be rude to the MAF procurement style, but it seems that they always tend to buy stuff without a proper objectives. In other words, "anyhow spend and buy" .. .tsk tsk ....

I think it is more political decision than anything else.

Let's me explain, the Austrian company wanted to shift their small arms(rifles and pistols etc) production to MY, which is of course good news to MY, FDI technology transfer etc.

But suddenly last year I think , Steyr Mannlicher announced that they will not be shifting the production to MY, some kind of disagreement or something with MY govt.

And now they are going back to AR family again?!? :lol:

Well, the M'sian economy is booming and thus this translate into more funds for the MAF and if this makes their political & military leaders happy & also 'possibly' add to their bank account, I don't see why they are SO UNCOMFORTABLE with such decisions! :lol:

Anyway back to the thread, is the MAF replacing ALL their Steyrs with the Colt M4 carbines and thus become the standard issue weapon for their military? Did I missed something or has the Military (particularly the Army) overnight 'transformed' into a Special Forces branch?

Good question. It appears that they are replacing everything, at least according to the article below.

The following is an extract. read the full article at http://www.nst.com.my/Current_News/nst/Thu...icle/index_html

Najib: M4 was chosen after extensive tests
27 Apr 2006
Leslie Andres and Dennis Wong


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PETALING JAYA: The choice of the M4 carbine to replace the Steyr AUG A1 rifles may have come as a surprise to some because the M4 is generally used by special forces, not conventional forces.

But it was deemed the most appropriate as it was user-friendly and its innovative design allowed it to be fitted with accessories like laser status designators and grenade launchers.

Defence Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak defended the choice.

"The M4 carbine was chosen after extensive tests proved its capabilities," he said at the Defence Services Asia 2006 exhibition in Subang yesterday.

He also presented a letter of intent (LoI) to SME Ordnance Sdn Bhd (SMEO) for the procurement of 14,000 rifles in a deal worth RM70 million.

SMEO had earlier signed a contract with Colt Defence LLC of the United States for transfer of technology to produce Colt weapons.

He said the 14,000 rifles were part of the first phase of replacing Steyr rifles, with the first batch being delivered from the US by the end of the year.

SMEO would eventually manufacture the rifles locally, with the Government requiring more than 100,000 weapons.

He said the RM70 million being spent also included accessories for the weapons.

(Article continues)

Hahahaha....when they first introduced the Steyr, we (my buddies, Instructors and even our "big boss") was actually impressed and abit worried because the Steyr was a better weapon than our M16s (this opinion is based on people I know, no offense intended for any wrong representation) In fact my company was selected to try out the HK MP5 (the version which uses 5.56mm ammo), becos' after passing out, we were allocated with Colt Carbines. Then we were like longin for the Steyr, then when we got to try out the HK....it was beautiful...balanced weapon and of course good to handle and nice to look at.


As for our northern neighbours.....what's new? Incomprehensible and lacking foresight as always.....

to add salt to their wounds, once they completed their replacement, just stay clear of their soldiers by a safety range of 200~250. beyond that without scope, i doubt the m4 can shoot reliably ...haha

Maybe they want to order EOTECH scopes/ reflex sights and Surefire torches for all their sweet old infantry. :lol:

From the malaysian Cari website, they were saying that the batches of locally licensed built Steyr is not up to standard, lacking in built quality , etc , hence the poor performance. Not sure if its true, but if thats the case, why bother getting another batch of licensed built M4 ??

the MAF procurement rationale & standards never failed to entertain me

I think Malaysia should seriously revamp their defence and weapon equipment procurement system. Maybe they can look south to learn a lesson or 2? :ph43r:

trying to learn how to make their own rifles.

Well, dramatic turnarounds seem to be the order of the day there.

Perhaps another sign of the new administration?

15 years was it that long? I recalled mass deployment only started in late 90s. Anyway, do they use the same type of rounds?

yes, they should be using the same type of round -> 5.56mm

put that aside, is it true that US Army also uses M4 as the standard weapon ?? I thought M16A4 is the standard issued weapon ??

Good Day.

With Standaerd Issued, refered to the majority of the forces, rather than focus on Special Ops related Group.

I maybe mistaken, but the standard issue of M16 varient is M16A2.

The M16A4 Rifle variant, is the standard M16A2 Rifle, with a flat top upper receiver and detachable carrying handle.

M4 is issued for selected Personnal/Teams.

Case Example: Infantry personnel receiving the M4 include platoon leaders, platoon sergeants, radio-telephone operators, and mortar gunners.

M4 is also issued to units with a requirement for an effective but compact, highly portable/slingable “hands free” weapon. Usage in close quarters and/or by soldiers who operate from vehicles with limited stowage space.

THat brings me to an interesting question........Why the SAF never issue carbines or perhaps invent SAR-21 carbines for support personnels? Wah lau, carrying the 84mm RR plus the SAR-21 really can die.

Good Day,

This I can confirm, SAF used to issued Carbine for selected units.

But with SAR21, this practise may not be so wide spread, as SAR21, is already shorter than M16S1.

Ask around, some units used to have Smaller weapon issued for self protection..

Tankees were issued with carbines as personal weapons , operationally wise it should be the case.

But they dun like it during CTSS becos less accuracy at 300m range which mean a disadvantge to them.

Shorter barrel = lower effective range.

Thats what I thought so .. but some guys in the malaysian forum are claiming that M4 is the standard issued weapon for US Army while M16 is the standard issued weapons for the US Marine Corp.

If I can remember correctly, the malaysian newspaper article also proclaim that M4 is the standard weapon for the US Army.

The M4 has replaced or will be replacing the M16A2 in all ranger and SOF units.
That's abt it. The grunts still get M16's

Taken from Janes

28 April 2006
DSA 2006: Malaysia trials trio in search for 8 x 8 requirement

By Christopher F Foss Jane's Land Desk Contributing Editor
Kuala Lumpur

The Malaysian Army is starting a six-week mobility trial of three 8 x 8 vehicles to meet a potential requirement for an initial acquisition of 98 vehicles, which will be sufficient to equip one cavalry regiment.

The three vehicles to be evaluated are:

* the Finnish Patria Vehicles Armoured Modular Vehicle (AMV), fitted with an Oto Melara two-person turret and armed with ATK GunSystems Company 30 mm MK 44 cannon;

* the Swiss Mowag Piranha IIIC, also fitted with an Oto Melara two-person turret; and

* the Turkish FNSS Pars, fitted with a one-person Sharpshooter turret armed with an ATK Gun Systems Company 25 mm M242 cannon.

Defence sources indicated to Jane's that of the total 98 vehicles some 82 are required to be fitted with a turret armed with an automatic cannon.

133 of 295 words

[End of non-subscriber extract.]


My my Singapore's STK Terrax not in the list shows the bad relations between the states. Another source of market lost. Well done PAP! (Remove if admin find distasteful)

Hope one day STK will be a true international suppiler of weapons.

it has nothing to do with PAP... at least for a fact... thailand, indonesia, brunei and phillipine all uses made in singapore weapon.

given the above... the only reason why malaysia dont use ours is obviously a reflection of their perception of us.

the real reason is of course race. they are a malay dominated bastion... we are chinese.

the indonesians may be malay, but they have no reason in hell to think that we will ever invade them.

the malaysian govt on the other hand are forever fearful of a malaysian chinese revolt with probable backing from singapore, even if the chances is one a billion.

afterall... malays only made up a mere 50% of their total population.. and probably even lower in the case of peninsular malaysia.

in short.. they are paranoid.

and seriously.. i dont wanna see ST selling them any weapon... i for one would kick ST boss stupid butt, if i ever have to end up fighting against a weapon system made by ST because they couldnt resist the lure of profit.

and i dont want malaysia to get hold of any of our product so that they can learn about the strength and weakness of our product...

yea... i am paranoid as well.

but i rather be safe then sorry later just for the sake of a few extra buck for ST.

Erm ... why isnt their LATEST product not included in the shortlist ??

Hang on a minute, is their latest product AV4 or AF4 a 4x4 or 8x8 ?? So they spend a billion ringgit developing their latest product and their army aint getting a single 1 of it ?

Hmmm........Maybe the Malaysian Armoured car is due for overseases mission or to arm their local militia and paramilitaries. I was thinking since they got the proton saga, why can't they invent a diesel engine for their new vehicle and have to resort to buying one? They seem to be obsessed with wheel-based vehicles even though the ground pressure issue, why? The AV-4 wheels also looks a little cheapo, one 5.56 can punch a hole in it! :D :P

Most probably they are going to buy the Turkish FNSS Pars due to political reasons and because they have previously bought the Adnan from the Turks as well. I am wondering since the Turks have an intrest in getting our Terrex then will there be a day where they will buy Made in Turkey, Terrex as well? :D

Looks like they are starting to replace their v150/condors/sibmas vehicles.

Wheeled armoured vehicles are used as APCs - moving their infantry fast and closer to their objectives, using highways, roads, and secondary roads. Its a better alternative to 3 tonners in terms of protection.

The future Malaysian combined arms division (I guess), will have an armoured brigade consisting of mostly tanks, a mechanised infantry brigade with tracked IFVs, and a motorised infantry brigade with 8x8 APCs in support. The division appears to be very mobile on vehicles, and with large ships, they can move between east and west Malaysia in future.

Despite the very weird purchases of hardware, their general direction of moving towards a modern conventional warfare army is taking shape.

I dun think it is the case that we dun sell weapons to MY but it is MY that do not want to buy weapon from us.

One good example is the CIS AGL which is almost defecto standard in SEA( used by SG, Indon, Thai, PH ), by they rather go for the more expensive US version.

Anyway MY is not big mkt( army size is less than 100k ), the weapon they bought usually a small qty anyway.

The big mkt in SEA are Vietnam, Thailand and Indon due to the fact they have a very large army but this of cos maybe restricted to budget cinstraints of these countries.

Both Thailand and Indon have bought SG made weapons, Vietnam I heard have asked STK to upgrade their SPH.

they bluff one lah.. that rubbish truck no need 1 billion ringgit to R&D one lah.. unless their engineers are monkeys and they have to spend half the money to teach them basic physics and mechanical engineering.

either their newspaper kok up and reported billions instead of millions... or someone is really pouring money into his own pocket... in open public view thinking that 20million malaysians are too dumb idiotic and moronic to question the economical sense of such an "investment".

just think how many hundreds if not thoudsands of that rubbish truck they have to build just to recover their billion dollar developement cost!!

Haha .... I like the nickname you gave to their AV4 ..... in any case, its good that they are starting to rely on themselves rather than to keep buying from others. Its a small step but nevertheless a good start.

But on the economical sense, if your primary market - (MAF) in this case, will potentially get only say 40~80 , does it make any sense to spend millions or billions developing it ?? If your primary market is only worth that little, you can't bang on oversea sales when your product are not novel and had to fight against other better off 4x4 products. Isnt it better off buying off straight from the shelves ?

One more point, in response to 1 of the thread above about getting proton to design a new engine , I doubt they have the capability to design even a simple engine yet, let alone a engine. If I'm not mistaken, in the 80s to 90s to maybe even now , they are probably still relying on Mitsubishi engine. What a waste for a car manufacturer that has started 20yrs++ in operation and still yet to have the knowledge to produce your own engine. They bought over Lotus but I doubt lotus produces their own engine as well.

I sincerely doubt that the AV-4 is so called "locally designed".

Click on the link for the Sabiex's Iguana FV-4 below and do a comparsion:

http://www.sabiex.com/iguana/design.html

Left hand drive vs right hand drive, no water jets & slightly different internal layout for AV-4.

The info above is posted by bcoy in here:

http://www.sgforums.com/?action=thread_dis...d=187447&page=2

we can alternatively look at this from another point of view.

I tend to view this as an option. this investment will give them an option to build another IFV/AFV or even a tank in the future. without this investment, they may not have the necessary expertise/experience to start a production line. the short cut for them is to copy from another model, modify it and call it is own.

ST started off this way and still doing so. remember BV-206, without this, where do you think our bronco come from....so in one way it is an option....if they fail this time round, the option to abandon future investment is there.

sabiex exported 8 FV4 to an asian country... i think we know now.. which asian country that is...

so.. i think they didnt even made the vehicle in malaysia, they just ordered the product, built it in belgium, send over to malaysia, call the press.. give it a new name and claim its 100percent malaysia!

:lol:

Consolidated articles from Flight International:

just dont hold your breath... its DSA2006 for god sake...

if the malaysian govt has learned anything from the chinese... that would be "KIA LOOSE FACE" :lol:

hmm ... are you sure they export it to an asian country ?? on sabiex website ?? maybe they ordered it for reverse engineering ?? pretty much like STK on BV206 ?

i saw the following from another forum... but the link the poster provided was not working... anyway.. here is the quote.

Would these purchases affect the military balance or the force balance between ourselves and them? I mean with the AEW&C aircraft, it will mean that they would be more able to monitor us right? Also, compared to our F15s and F16s, how would their SU30s match up? I know that the aircraft isn't everything, but more of the pilot training and skill. Generally speaking, would their SU30s outfight our aircrafts?

Also, they have recently bought much hardware in terms of AA missiles radars etc, would it mean that our strike aircraft now has a tougher time penetrating their airspace?

The main crux of my questions are basically to know if we still have that edge over our neighbours and can we still expect to triumph over them like in the 1990s when I was still in the force and attended talks and discussions which quantified that we maintain a comfortable edge over them.